Forum:AudioBox Template
=Project: AudioBox Template (VOTING OPEN)= ---- Forums: Index > Projects > | |[[Category:Projects| ]]}} Currently developed by: , Template:CodexEntry originally created by Dammej. :Developer(s) notes: See below. :Status last updated: 02-02-11 Current location: User:Merrell/Sandbox/AudioBox Testing area: User:Merrell/AudioBox_Test_1 Page destination: Template:AudioBox ---- __TOC__ Other Notes Voting has been open for a while now. Please vote! --- 19:35, March 29, 2011 (UTC) Voting For # I think we could use it and I don't see why we couldn't add audio to the codex entries. In my opinion, we should probably reserve audio for the primary codex entries because that's what they do in the game. RiftJargon 20:04, June 2, 2011 (UTC) # Meant to do this a few days ago. Given that my previous objection turns out to be a non-issue, I'm in favor of this proposal. SpartHawg948 20:27, June 2, 2011 (UTC) #I'm in favor of this. It seems like it may be rather useful. I'm intrigued by the possible use of dialog in articles. Arbington 22:18, June 2, 2011 (UTC) Against #I'm just against this because of both reasons listed below. Needs More Work, i.e. less icons and what not, and Not needed. We don't need two templates to do the job that one can when certain parameters aren't put in. Lancer1289 20:38, June 2, 2011 (UTC) :2.Same as above.--Legionwrex 22:20, June 2, 2011 (UTC) :3. I don't think we need them.--Bluegear93 09:41, June 3, 2011 (UTC) Needs More Work Not Needed Other Status *" removed. *Ability to specify an icon image added. *Ability to change how wide the play button is added. *Ability to center play button added. *Ability to specify icon size added. *Datapad image now transparent. *Ability to place image below audio. Preview Comments div class I like! The ability to use different icons for the audio is a neat addition. I'm not sure about the usability though. A speaker with 'sound waves' coming out of it screams 'audio', while an alliance symbol doesn't necessarily communicate the same idea. Still, it uses a sensible default, so I don't see that as a big deal breaker. One thing of note though: the original usage of the div with the 'codexaudio' class was to get around some funkyness associated with the older mediawiki software. Now that it's been upgraded, a surrounding div is no longer needed. I'm about to remove the class from the original template as I type this. All in all, good job! -- Dammej (talk) 03:03, February 1, 2011 (UTC) :Thanks! I'm probably going to keep the div in case Wikia has some regressions, and it's always good to have legacy support. :Also, I just added the ability to change the width of the play button. :--Swooshy 03:41, February 1, 2011 (UTC) ::Legacy support is a worthy aim, just know that the 'audiobox' div currently does nothing. There's no style defined which uses it, so there's no difference in how it's displayed (the default styling for a div is no styling whatsoever). For reference, check out the comment I left at Lancer's talk page which contains the css styling related to the 'codexaudio' template. -- Dammej (talk) 03:58, February 1, 2011 (UTC) :::Ah, OK. I just thought it was some sort of Wiki/HTML parsing problem, like the embedded PDFs in Chrome. --Swooshy 04:11, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Default icon OK, I've just changed the default icon to . Thoughts? Any new ideas? Possibly ability to specify icon size? --Swooshy 22:49, February 1, 2011 (UTC) :Honestly, my first though is that I hate the color of the icon. It's too garish. It should be something unobtrusive that doesn't leap off the page and assail the eyes of the viewer. Something that doesn't conflict with the color scheme of the site. Contrasting colors is one thing, but this is straight-up conflict. Of all the options presented on your sandbox page, I prefer the last one, the upturned speaker with sound waves coming out. That's my initial impression. Were we to start voting right now, my vote would be 'Against - Needs more work'. SpartHawg948 20:32, February 3, 2011 (UTC) :::How's this: ? --Swooshy 22:38, February 3, 2011 (UTC) ::::Better, but I still prefer the other one mentioned in my previous comment. SpartHawg948 22:42, February 3, 2011 (UTC) :::::I'm actually trying to make it fit the site's color scheme. I like it better because it looks more Mass Effect-y than the Gnome icon. --Swooshy 22:47, February 3, 2011 (UTC) ::::::We'll have to agree to disagree there. 1) It doesn't look at all Mass Effect-y to me, certainly no more so than the other one, and 2) We've never needed to make templates look Mass Effect-y before. In fact, most templates are made to look deliberately non Mass Effect-y. SpartHawg948 22:54, February 3, 2011 (UTC) :::::::I've made another slight modification. If you still don't like it, I'll change it to the Gnome icon. --Swooshy 22:56, February 3, 2011 (UTC) ::::::::Yeah, I'm still not digging it. Changing the color can only do so much. I honestly don't see the need to do away with the icon we've been using for audio files in favor of a bigger and more obtrusive one that looks like a bell that's been knocked onto its side. The current icon works great. It integrates well with the site color scheme and is just distinct enough to make its presence known without ruining the feel of the site by seeming out of place. SpartHawg948 23:12, February 3, 2011 (UTC) :::::::::Changed it to the Gnome icon, but I'm going to keep looking for something else to use because I'm insane like that. --Swooshy 23:17, February 3, 2011 (UTC) resetI'm tempted to stick the VLC traffic cone up there, but I know we'll have a bunch of folks asking what a traffic cone has to do with audio. --Swooshy 23:26, February 3, 2011 (UTC) :I've decided that I've spent enough time on trying to find another icon. -- 01:47, February 18, 2011 (UTC) :Okay I'll come clean, I only voted for it because Spart was voting against it. While I am considering the actual issue, I only voted for it becuase Spart didn't want to see it happen. And I did it because he annoys the crap out of me! ::Language Please. Lancer1289 20:31, June 2, 2011 (UTC) :::Way to keep an open mind, RiftJargon. That sort of "I don't like him so I'll do the opposite of whatever he does" mindset will really get you places in life. So again, good job on demonstrating your mature open-mindedness. SpartHawg948 20:40, June 2, 2011 (UTC) Merging? Well I've been thinking, what's the point in having two? Do you mean to say you can't just turn the CodexEntry into AudioBox, and have the CodexEntry as a default setting (using stuff and a parameter, which perhaps also has custom, codex, renegade, paragon etc)? Cos if the issue is having to change the templates' name on all pages, a bot could do that or a user with time (I've done this stuff loads before, etc). So why don't we do that? Sorry if i'm not making much sense.--Technobliterator 15:36, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Other Comments ##That's actually not the default icon. Check the template page for more info. --- 19:32, May 30, 2011 (UTC) Ah, I see. Two things for future reference: First, the example presented in the proposal should be using default features. Using non-defaults, as we have seen here, creates confusion. Second, voting sections are only to be used for votes. Nothing should be in voting sections other than votes. Any comments people wish to make regarding votes need to be in a comment section. SpartHawg948 19:56, May 30, 2011 (UTC) :Just a quick note regarding RiftJargon's vote and comment above - we already do have audio for the Codex entries. SpartHawg948 20:10, June 2, 2011 (UTC) Am I allowed to vote, or have I not made enough contributions?--Technobliterator 11:32, June 3, 2011 (UTC) :Anyone can vote. We don't have that arbitrary restriction that some wikis do. Although we nay have to consider it later, but for now, anyone can vote. Lancer1289 16:38, June 3, 2011 (UTC) ::I don't think we'll need to consider that one. As far as I'm concerned, there should be no rules stating you need ___ many edits to vote. That's one of the things that peeves me about some wikis. I tried to vote on something once on Wookieepedia, and had my vote stricken because I fell four edits short of the requirement. Four lousy edits. The only potential change I could see here is possibly amending policy to mandate that you must be a registered user to vote, though even that is still hypothetical at this point. SpartHawg948 21:31, June 3, 2011 (UTC)